No. He defended his country from an invading force. Whether that invasion was justified is another matter all together. We invaded him.
Yeah, he got invaded out of the blue. No action/activity (or lack thereof) prior to that had any bearing on that. 'kay, we see where you are coming from now. I guess the shoe does fit! Come to think of it, I guess you can reason that every war in the history of man just fell out of the blue. Additionally, you have just sealed the fate of every other dysfunctional tribal warlord state on this earth where the innocent populace are in need of aid. Too bad for them, right? They are SOL for good, since any effort to intervene is equivocally an "invasion".
...or perhaps, you are in advocation of the premise that you cannot save that which cannot be saved? Just bomb the entire territory into oblivion and start anew? You can't save them, can't win hearts & minds, the atrocity doesn't cease just because you turn your back, can't depend on fellow neighbors to keep'em in line- so that really only leaves one option left.
Quote:
I wasn't upset. I simply asked you to state what you mean rather than use a metaphor. I'm still waiting for an explicit statement of what you meant by "if the shoe fits."
Keep waitin'! I guess that is your button then. This is fun! It seems you are fitting even better into that shoe with every new post.
Nope. He didn't get invaded out of the blue. It went something like this:
US: "You've got stuff you're not supposed to have!"
SH: "Nuh uh. We got rid of it all like we were 'sposed to"
US: "Uh huh. We're sending in inspectors!"
SH: "OK. Fine. Bastards."
Inspectors: "We can't find anything and need more time."
SH: "See? I told you so."
US, to inspectors: "No! No more time!"
And then we invaded.
Quote:
I guess the shoe does fit!
Please be explicit here. What, exactly, are you trying to say while you hid behind a metaphor?
Quote:
Come to think of it, I guess you can reason that every war in the history of man just fell out of the blue.
You apparently have a limited view of history, but you're welcome to invent points I haven't made and argue against them, if you like.
Quote:
Additionally, you have just sealed the fate of every other dysfunctional tribal warlord state on this earth where the innocent populace are in need of aid.
I actually didn't do anything. Are you inventing points to argue against again?
Quote:
any effort to intervene is equivocally an "invasion".
If we send troops into a sovereign nation in order to fight, it is, indeed, an invasion. Not all invasions are bad, of course. Some are necessary; some are not.
Quote:
...or perhaps, you are in advocation of the premise that you cannot save that which cannot be saved? Just bomb the entire territory into oblivion and start anew? You can't save them, can't win hearts & minds, the atrocity doesn't cease just because you turn your back, can't depend on fellow neighbors to keep'em in line- so that really only leaves one option left.
There you go again, making up points to ague against. Maybe you're an advocate of eating Iraqi babies? What kind of a person are you?!
Quote:
Keep waitin'! I guess that is your button then. This is fun! It seems you are fitting even better into that shoe with every new post.
Whatever. Have all the fun you like. I'm just asking a very simple question which you refuse (and now someone else has asked for clarification) what you mean when you say "the shoe fits."
Now this shoe, it fits the fool who cares more about belligerent saber rattling then the actual security of the US. The kind of ass who gets his rocks off fantasizing about dead Arabs and revenge right out of a shitty Arnold movie.
The kind of dim-witted peckerwood that really can't handle actual sustained thought but feels secure that flat declarations of bloody minded brutality serve as an apt substitute.
And the worst thing about this shoe is the way it so closely conforms to the foot of the profoundly ignorant tool who fancies himself a patriot when in fact with his every utterance displays his contempt for American values of justice, the rule of law, and international cooperation.
Instead, the foot wear candidate believes only in force and retribution, the political philosophy of thugs and despots. Yet, oddly, he continues to insist that his almost comical limitations somehow embody what is best about his country, while any effort to effect real solutions that might have some lasting result beyond the satisfactions of blood-lust are the mark of cowardice and collaboration.
Now some might say this shoe is appropriate for a betrayer of America, that such a shoe should grace the foot of someone about to leave our fair land, seeking his fortune in a place more in keeping with his personal philosophy.
A place where violent repression of dissent is the norm and the sword of retribution falls heavily if somewhat indiscriminately. Afghanistan, maybe.
But I would never say that. I merely offer the shoe.
Wow. This is a great discussion. I especially like the part where you respond to neither requests for clarification about a metaphor you used nor did you respond to my allegation that you want to eat Iraqi babies.
Well done, Randycat! I've not seen anyone run away from a debate so quickly in a long time!
It really doesn't matter at this point. If they negotiate with the terrorists they will kidnap more, demand more and murder more people. If they don't negotiate the terrorists will continue to kidnap and murder people.
Do we pull out completely and let them fend for themselves?
Do we retaliate by hunting them down?
Do we try to be the peacemakers between the battling sides and hope that everyone comes out happy?
What are we supposed to do?
What are our world leaders doing to fix this problem?
How many more people 'just trying to help them out' have to be tortured and mutilated before this ends?
I'll tell you one thing. The families of the the people who've been murdered for freakin 'jihad' don't have world peace in their minds. If it happened to someone close to me I'd be looking to go 'mid-evil' on those bad guys.
Everyone has an opinion but no one seems to have an answer.
Every day we have to read about some troops getting killed or some civilian who was trying to help get kidnapped then sliced up. I don't want to readthe news anymore but I can't help seeing the headline on my way to the sports section....
And can someone explain to me where violence plays a role in a supposed peaceful religion?
It's 2004 A.D. for God's, Allah's and Christ's sake!!!!
You'd think as a cilvilization we'd have progressed past this kind of behavior by now...
Seeing all this garbage going on makes us geeks wish for a more Star-Trek-like world these days...
I sure as heck don't have an answer to all these problems.
Shrug your shoulders and take it. Fix the Iraqi government and policing situation then let their judicial system handle the people that cause problems. A beheading of an ally, for all intents and purposes, is simply collateral damage.
Well done, Randycat! I've not seen anyone run away from a debate so quickly in a long time!
I'm still here, aren't I? I haven't run away (why should I?). I am just not particularly obliged to indulge your trolling. Go figure... We do see your attempt to spin something that is not true, however.
If the shoe fits, then it fits. If it doesn't, then you have nothing to object to, as it doesn't apply to you. (duh?) You and your crony seem more than a little perturbed, however. Hmmm...
Oh what to do? This is tuff. To leave Iraq will not solve the problem in the long run. That will only set it aside to fester. Nothing we negotiate with them will satisfy them. How to stop people who do not fear death? The only answer is to kill them all before they kill us, but is that possible? Can we kill them all?
I find this to be no surprise. The fact that people actually banked on terrorists to cooperate and negotiate this man's release is naive. You can never negotiate with terrorists under any circumstance.
The only answer is to kill them all before they kill us, but is that possible? Can we kill them all?
But who is "they?" The terrorists? how do you separate the terrorists from the regular citizens? They won't jump around and say, look, i'm a terrorist. The trouble with a war on terror is that it cannot be "won" anymore than a war on drugs can. Terror could probably be squelched somewhat through a decent international coalition, but so far the current administration has done nothing but throw fuel on the fire. The more we "fight" them, the closer they are to the holy war they want.
I'd say right now, "they" are the ones who are doing the beheadings. I wouldn't mind seeing them get taken out, personally.
As a side note, there may be an ironic twist to these ethnic beheadings. They beheaded a S Korean civilian to dissuade the deploying of S Korean troops. Well, when they arrive, you can be sure they will do their duty with a shade of personal investment. These terrorists just made it a whole lot worse for themselves (let alone any ME native combatants) for every ethnic military force that will happen to be pursuing them.
It really doesn't matter at this point. If they negotiate with the terrorists they will kidnap more, demand more and murder more people. If they don't negotiate the terrorists will continue to kidnap and murder people.
Comments
Originally posted by midwinter
No. He defended his country from an invading force. Whether that invasion was justified is another matter all together. We invaded him.
Yeah, he got invaded out of the blue.
...or perhaps, you are in advocation of the premise that you cannot save that which cannot be saved? Just bomb the entire territory into oblivion and start anew? You can't save them, can't win hearts & minds, the atrocity doesn't cease just because you turn your back, can't depend on fellow neighbors to keep'em in line- so that really only leaves one option left.
Quote:
I wasn't upset. I simply asked you to state what you mean rather than use a metaphor. I'm still waiting for an explicit statement of what you meant by "if the shoe fits."
Keep waitin'! I guess that is your button then. This is fun! It seems you are fitting even better into that shoe with every new post.
Originally posted by Randycat99
Yeah, he got invaded out of the blue.
Nope. He didn't get invaded out of the blue. It went something like this:
US: "You've got stuff you're not supposed to have!"
SH: "Nuh uh. We got rid of it all like we were 'sposed to"
US: "Uh huh. We're sending in inspectors!"
SH: "OK. Fine. Bastards."
Inspectors: "We can't find anything and need more time."
SH: "See? I told you so."
US, to inspectors: "No! No more time!"
And then we invaded.
I guess the shoe does fit!
Please be explicit here. What, exactly, are you trying to say while you hid behind a metaphor?
Come to think of it, I guess you can reason that every war in the history of man just fell out of the blue.
You apparently have a limited view of history, but you're welcome to invent points I haven't made and argue against them, if you like.
Additionally, you have just sealed the fate of every other dysfunctional tribal warlord state on this earth where the innocent populace are in need of aid.
I actually didn't do anything. Are you inventing points to argue against again?
any effort to intervene is equivocally an "invasion".
If we send troops into a sovereign nation in order to fight, it is, indeed, an invasion. Not all invasions are bad, of course. Some are necessary; some are not.
...or perhaps, you are in advocation of the premise that you cannot save that which cannot be saved? Just bomb the entire territory into oblivion and start anew? You can't save them, can't win hearts & minds, the atrocity doesn't cease just because you turn your back, can't depend on fellow neighbors to keep'em in line- so that really only leaves one option left.
There you go again, making up points to ague against. Maybe you're an advocate of eating Iraqi babies? What kind of a person are you?!
Keep waitin'! I guess that is your button then. This is fun! It seems you are fitting even better into that shoe with every new post.
Whatever. Have all the fun you like. I'm just asking a very simple question which you refuse (and now someone else has asked for clarification) what you mean when you say "the shoe fits."
Now this shoe, it fits the fool who cares more about belligerent saber rattling then the actual security of the US. The kind of ass who gets his rocks off fantasizing about dead Arabs and revenge right out of a shitty Arnold movie.
The kind of dim-witted peckerwood that really can't handle actual sustained thought but feels secure that flat declarations of bloody minded brutality serve as an apt substitute.
And the worst thing about this shoe is the way it so closely conforms to the foot of the profoundly ignorant tool who fancies himself a patriot when in fact with his every utterance displays his contempt for American values of justice, the rule of law, and international cooperation.
Instead, the foot wear candidate believes only in force and retribution, the political philosophy of thugs and despots. Yet, oddly, he continues to insist that his almost comical limitations somehow embody what is best about his country, while any effort to effect real solutions that might have some lasting result beyond the satisfactions of blood-lust are the mark of cowardice and collaboration.
Now some might say this shoe is appropriate for a betrayer of America, that such a shoe should grace the foot of someone about to leave our fair land, seeking his fortune in a place more in keeping with his personal philosophy.
A place where violent repression of dissent is the norm and the sword of retribution falls heavily if somewhat indiscriminately. Afghanistan, maybe.
But I would never say that. I merely offer the shoe.
Well done, Randycat! I've not seen anyone run away from a debate so quickly in a long time!
Originally posted by Placebo
This sure isn't going to help the situation...
So you think we should negotiate with terrorists?
Originally posted by Scott
So you think we should negotiate with terrorists?
It really doesn't matter at this point. If they negotiate with the terrorists they will kidnap more, demand more and murder more people. If they don't negotiate the terrorists will continue to kidnap and murder people.
Do we pull out completely and let them fend for themselves?
Do we retaliate by hunting them down?
Do we try to be the peacemakers between the battling sides and hope that everyone comes out happy?
What are we supposed to do?
What are our world leaders doing to fix this problem?
How many more people 'just trying to help them out' have to be tortured and mutilated before this ends?
I'll tell you one thing. The families of the the people who've been murdered for freakin 'jihad' don't have world peace in their minds. If it happened to someone close to me I'd be looking to go 'mid-evil' on those bad guys.
Everyone has an opinion but no one seems to have an answer.
Every day we have to read about some troops getting killed or some civilian who was trying to help get kidnapped then sliced up. I don't want to readthe news anymore but I can't help seeing the headline on my way to the sports section....
And can someone explain to me where violence plays a role in a supposed peaceful religion?
It's 2004 A.D. for God's, Allah's and Christ's sake!!!!
You'd think as a cilvilization we'd have progressed past this kind of behavior by now...
Seeing all this garbage going on makes us geeks wish for a more Star-Trek-like world these days...
I sure as heck don't have an answer to all these problems.
I hope someone comes up with something soon...
End. Chapter One.
Originally posted by O-Mac
So what is the solution?
Shrug your shoulders and take it. Fix the Iraqi government and policing situation then let their judicial system handle the people that cause problems. A beheading of an ally, for all intents and purposes, is simply collateral damage.
Originally posted by midwinter
Well done, Randycat! I've not seen anyone run away from a debate so quickly in a long time!
I'm still here, aren't I? I haven't run away (why should I?). I am just not particularly obliged to indulge your trolling. Go figure...
If the shoe fits, then it fits. If it doesn't, then you have nothing to object to, as it doesn't apply to you. (duh?) You and your crony seem more than a little perturbed, however. Hmmm...
Viva the Jihad!
Originally posted by Common Man
The only answer is to kill them all before they kill us, but is that possible? Can we kill them all?
But who is "they?" The terrorists? how do you separate the terrorists from the regular citizens? They won't jump around and say, look, i'm a terrorist. The trouble with a war on terror is that it cannot be "won" anymore than a war on drugs can. Terror could probably be squelched somewhat through a decent international coalition, but so far the current administration has done nothing but throw fuel on the fire. The more we "fight" them, the closer they are to the holy war they want.
As a side note, there may be an ironic twist to these ethnic beheadings. They beheaded a S Korean civilian to dissuade the deploying of S Korean troops. Well, when they arrive, you can be sure they will do their duty with a shade of personal investment. These terrorists just made it a whole lot worse for themselves (let alone any ME native combatants) for every ethnic military force that will happen to be pursuing them.
Originally posted by InactionMan
It really doesn't matter at this point. If they negotiate with the terrorists they will kidnap more, demand more and murder more people. If they don't negotiate the terrorists will continue to kidnap and murder people.
Not if they are killed before they kidnap more.
Originally posted by Scott
Not if they are killed before they kidnap more.
Again, assuming a finite number.
Originally posted by Scott
Certainly they are not infinite.
Go tell that to Israel and England, who have been operating under the assumption that if they can just kill all the terrorists, everything'll be fine.